click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
would be good? >> we have an enormous deficit problem in the united states. nobody's dealt with it since bill clinton was president of the united states. there are a number of things we're going to have to do in order to meet our deficit. we're going to have to both raise taxes and cut spending. one of the areas we must cut spending is defense. there hasn't been serious cuts in defense in 30 years. the defense industry is well positioned. they have plants in something in over 300 districts. there's a lot of bipartisan defense spending. for example, the defense authorization bill that just passed yesterday in the senate gave the pentagon $17 billion more than they asked for. so to think that any industry or any taxpayer or any group of people who depend on government spending can be exempted from the serious problem that we have that's caused by this deficit is a mistake. everybody is going to have to pay for this. >> dawn, right or wrong, the defense industry has this reputation of being bloated, overcharging. are we at a point where we could afford to make cuts in defense spending to tr
's the federal deficit. it's the federal debt, which is a huge risk for national security. right now the defense department has taken, as i said, about can half a trillion dollars of deduction in the first round but the strategy aligns to the point we can meet national security objectives and still accomplish or make though cuts. if you start putting another half a trillion on top of, that you shatter the strategy. and then national security has to be free thought. i propose we need more of a fiscal stairstep reduction so that reductions can be made with strategy in mind. strategy and national security needs have got to be tweaked and done in concert. that's the way to do this. and i think in the end, you know, you're going to have to see reduction -- you're going to have to see more reductions in defense, but hopefully nowhere near the levels that the fiscal cliff and sequestration would impose. >> so, are employees expecting this? i mean, have you to be living under a rock not to see what's going on with the fiscal cliff, but are you planning on laying off employees if sequestration is trigger
and deficits of the u.s., what are the implications for our kids? what are the implications for the economy? give it to us straight. >> there's no question that the most important challenge for us to tackle here is controlling health care costs. medicare is at the center of it when it comes to the budget. we're going to have to do as much as possible to get on top of the fact that health care costs squeezing out the rest of the budget. that's true through the whole system, and we're going to have to fix the way that entitlement program works. in terms of what this means for the country, the whole issue here is are we going to leave the economy strong enough for the next generation? that's what this comes down to. what we're going now, we're making these short-term choices. we've been make them for years. we're spending more than we're willing to pay for, and we're basically saying to the next generation, here's the bill. and it's going to just undermine the strength of the economy. i should point out, we're not borrowing that to invest. we're borrowing that to consume. so as important as it
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3